BIMAL SARMA Vs. DAIBAK KUMARI DEVI
LAWS(GAU)-2018-10-110
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on October 12,2018

BIMAL SARMA Appellant
VERSUS
Daibak Kumari Devi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Prasanta Kumar Deka, J. - (1.) Heard Mr.D. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the defendant appellant No.1 and Mr.S. Ali, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent-plaintiff.
(2.) The present appellants and the proforma respondents are defendants in Title Suit No. 39/2006 in the Court of learned Munsiff No. I at Morigaon which is preferred by the present plaintiff respondent for declaration of right, title and interest over 'ka' schedule land measuring 1 katha out of 1katha 10 lechas of land covered by dag No. 480 of K. P. Patta No. 136 of village Jagiroad under Mouza Gova in the district of Morigaon, for recovery of khas possession after demolition of the standing structures over the 'kha' schedule land within the 'Ka'schedule and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants appellants from entering into the said 'kha' schedule land more specifically described in 'Ga'(1) and 'Ga' (2) schedule land within 'Kha' schedule land.
(3.) The pleadings of plaintiff respondent is that a plot of land measuring 1 katha 10 lechas consisting of 'Ka' schedule land of 1 katha was purchased by the plaintiff respondent at a consideration of Rs. 90/- from one Bhuban Mauzadar who transferred the same with his consent putting his signature in the Chitha. Chandi Charan Sarma, the original defendant Appellant No.2 substituted by his legal heirs vide order dated 04.10.2013 in this Second Appeal was possessing a portion measuring 10 lechas of land out of said total land measuring 1 katha 10 lechas which was allowed to remain with him by the plaintiff respondent. The defendant appellant No. 1 is the son of the plaintiff respondent who was allowed to possess more or less 8 lessas of land as there was constraint in living space in the house of the plaintiff appellant. The defendant appellant No. 1 constructed the ground floor of RCC building thereon over 8 lessas of land and on 18.04.2004 the defendant appellant No.1 encroached another 4(four) lechas of land in order to carry out illegal construction thereon. The plaintiff respondent objected to it following which the defendant appellant No.1 threatened and abused her. An FIR was lodged by the plaintiff respondent. However, considering the family dispute, a village 'Mel'' took place and a settlement deed dated 20.04.2014 was also shown to be executed in presence of the elderly persons of the locality. The signature of the plaintiff respondent was taken while she was almost in an unconscious state owing to the threat and assault carried out by the defendant appellant No.1. The elder son of the plaintiff respondent in order to bring peace amongst the family members relinquished his purported four lessas of land to be devolved on him contingent on the death of plaintiff respondent and the same purportedly included in the said settlement deed in favour of defendant appellant No.1. Terming the said settlement deed having no force under the law, the plaintiff respondent filed the suit with the reliefs herein above stated.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.